OurPrincess wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

If someone below the “owner” rank can strike the owner, then they should be the owner's leader. And if someone below the “owner's leader” rank can strike the owner's leader, then they should be the owner's leader's leader and so on. It just leads to a confusing paradox.

New law got passed that allows it.

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

The owner still has to follow his own laws.

OurPrincess wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

If someone below the “owner” rank can strike the owner, then they should be the owner's leader. And if someone below the “owner's leader” rank can strike the owner's leader, then they should be the owner's leader's leader and so on. It just leads to a confusing paradox.

Exactly

-Iimitless- wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

The owner still has to follow his own laws.

What law exactly am I breaking?

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

OurPrincess wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

If someone below the “owner” rank can strike the owner, then they should be the owner's leader. And if someone below the “owner's leader” rank can strike the owner's leader, then they should be the owner's leader's leader and so on. It just leads to a confusing paradox.

New law got passed that allows it.

Your misunderstanding the law. WHERE IN ANY OF THE LAW says that you can strike the owner.
Also, I would like to mention that you have said you were leaving countless times, but still didn't.

Anyways, I'm gonna update the old thread now.

MClovers wrote:

-Iimitless- wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

The owner still has to follow his own laws.

What law exactly am I breaking?

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

OurPrincess wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

If someone below the “owner” rank can strike the owner, then they should be the owner's leader. And if someone below the “owner's leader” rank can strike the owner's leader, then they should be the owner's leader's leader and so on. It just leads to a confusing paradox.

New law got passed that allows it.

Your misunderstanding the law. WHERE IN ANY OF THE LAW says that you can strike the owner.
Also, I would like to mention that you have said you were leaving countless times, but still didn't.

Anyways, I'm gonna update the old thread now.

umm here

The Strike thing wrote:

2.1: The owner and employees can get strikes, but under a new system. If he/she's done something against the rules, there will be a vote to strike him/her or not. If the vote says to strike him, he/she will get striked. Once he/she gets 3 strikes, he will be suspended from his job and the highest position person that is active will replace him during this time (OWNER ONLY). First suspension is one day, second is 3 days, and third is 5 days and onwards it will add 2+ days.

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

MClovers wrote:

-Iimitless- wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

The owner still has to follow his own laws.

What law exactly am I breaking?

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

OurPrincess wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

If someone below the “owner” rank can strike the owner, then they should be the owner's leader. And if someone below the “owner's leader” rank can strike the owner's leader, then they should be the owner's leader's leader and so on. It just leads to a confusing paradox.

New law got passed that allows it.

Your misunderstanding the law. WHERE IN ANY OF THE LAW says that you can strike the owner.
Also, I would like to mention that you have said you were leaving countless times, but still didn't.

Anyways, I'm gonna update the old thread now.

umm here

The Strike thing wrote:

2.1: The owner and employees can get strikes, but under a new system. If he/she's done something against the rules, there will be a vote to strike him/her or not. If the vote says to strike him, he/she will get striked. Once he/she gets 3 strikes, he will be suspended from his job and the highest position person that is active will replace him during this time (OWNER ONLY). First suspension is one day, second is 3 days, and third is 5 days and onwards it will add 2+ days.

You still haven't stated the reason why I'm being striked. You pretty much said "Let's strike MC for literally no reason!!!"
I literally own ShopBux, I don't think you understand how striking works. I literally OWN SHOPBUX!
And I don't care if you say I'm getting mad, because I am, and it's not hard to understand why.
I've given you countless chances and this is how you repay me. That's it. I'm done!
Give me the link to the exact post. Give me EVERY SINGLE REASON why you think I should be striked.
Because it's not gonna happen either way.
And I don't care if you or anyone else goes on about democracy. I'm just getting mad because you are trying to strike me in my own organization that me and CR built from the ground. I really don't think you know how hard it was to make this whole thing. I'm not trying to take all the credit for making ShopBux, it's 50/50 between me and CR (and a bit for all the employees).
It's been so hard to give you ALL THOSE CHANCES!
Everyone was pressuring me to give you them. And you were really lucky that I was a person that gives in really easily. Being stressed more in real life has helped me learn that I can hang out and fit in around people but I still help myself more than I help others. That sounds selfish but it's not cruel to want the best for yourself.
So, with that being said: Don't even try this boy.

moving back!
https://scratch-mit-edu.ezproxy.canberra.edu.au/discuss/topic/347154/?page=339
DD

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

MClovers wrote:

-Iimitless- wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

The owner still has to follow his own laws.

What law exactly am I breaking?

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

OurPrincess wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

If someone below the “owner” rank can strike the owner, then they should be the owner's leader. And if someone below the “owner's leader” rank can strike the owner's leader, then they should be the owner's leader's leader and so on. It just leads to a confusing paradox.

New law got passed that allows it.

Your misunderstanding the law. WHERE IN ANY OF THE LAW says that you can strike the owner.
Also, I would like to mention that you have said you were leaving countless times, but still didn't.

Anyways, I'm gonna update the old thread now.

umm here

The Strike thing wrote:

2.1: The owner and employees can get strikes, but under a new system. If he/she's done something against the rules, there will be a vote to strike him/her or not. If the vote says to strike him, he/she will get striked. Once he/she gets 3 strikes, he will be suspended from his job and the highest position person that is active will replace him during this time (OWNER ONLY). First suspension is one day, second is 3 days, and third is 5 days and onwards it will add 2+ days.

You still haven't stated the reason why I'm being striked. You pretty much said "Let's strike MC for literally no reason!!!"
I literally own ShopBux, I don't think you understand how striking works. I literally OWN SHOPBUX!
And I don't care if you say I'm getting mad, because I am, and it's not hard to understand why.
I've given you countless chances and this is how you repay me. That's it. I'm done!
Give me the link to the exact post. Give me EVERY SINGLE REASON why you think I should be striked.
Because it's not gonna happen either way.
And I don't care if you or anyone else goes on about democracy. I'm just getting mad because you are trying to strike me in my own organization that me and CR built from the ground. I really don't think you know how hard it was to make this whole thing. I'm not trying to take all the credit for making ShopBux, it's 50/50 between me and CR (and a bit for all the employees).
It's been so hard to give you ALL THOSE CHANCES!
Everyone was pressuring me to give you them. And you were really lucky that I was a person that gives in really easily. Being stressed more in real life has helped me learn that I can hang out and fit in around people but I still help myself more than I help others. That sounds selfish but it's not cruel to want the best for yourself.
So, with that being said: Don't even try this boy.

Breaking ur law of democracy…
————–
hi
scratch.mit.edu/discuss/post/3808662

MCLovers Strike
It's a tie.
WHO VOTED MAYBE BECAUSE WE NARROW DOWN TO YES OR NO

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

MClovers wrote:

-Iimitless- wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

The owner still has to follow his own laws.

What law exactly am I breaking?

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

OurPrincess wrote:

MClovers wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

Anyways, ever since that equality bill was added, the MC strike argument is now valid again.
VOTE FOR MC STRIKE
https://strawpoll.com/f6dh7ag5
mc this is accordance to the new law

I know you don't like me, but why? You physically can't strike the owner. That's not how this works.

If someone below the “owner” rank can strike the owner, then they should be the owner's leader. And if someone below the “owner's leader” rank can strike the owner's leader, then they should be the owner's leader's leader and so on. It just leads to a confusing paradox.

New law got passed that allows it.

Your misunderstanding the law. WHERE IN ANY OF THE LAW says that you can strike the owner.
Also, I would like to mention that you have said you were leaving countless times, but still didn't.

Anyways, I'm gonna update the old thread now.

umm here

The Strike thing wrote:

2.1: The owner and employees can get strikes, but under a new system. If he/she's done something against the rules, there will be a vote to strike him/her or not. If the vote says to strike him, he/she will get striked. Once he/she gets 3 strikes, he will be suspended from his job and the highest position person that is active will replace him during this time (OWNER ONLY). First suspension is one day, second is 3 days, and third is 5 days and onwards it will add 2+ days.

You still haven't stated the reason why I'm being striked. You pretty much said "Let's strike MC for literally no reason!!!"
I literally own ShopBux, I don't think you understand how striking works. I literally OWN SHOPBUX!
And I don't care if you say I'm getting mad, because I am, and it's not hard to understand why.
I've given you countless chances and this is how you repay me. That's it. I'm done!
Give me the link to the exact post. Give me EVERY SINGLE REASON why you think I should be striked.
Because it's not gonna happen either way.
And I don't care if you or anyone else goes on about democracy. I'm just getting mad because you are trying to strike me in my own organization that me and CR built from the ground. I really don't think you know how hard it was to make this whole thing. I'm not trying to take all the credit for making ShopBux, it's 50/50 between me and CR (and a bit for all the employees).
It's been so hard to give you ALL THOSE CHANCES!
Everyone was pressuring me to give you them. And you were really lucky that I was a person that gives in really easily. Being stressed more in real life has helped me learn that I can hang out and fit in around people but I still help myself more than I help others. That sounds selfish but it's not cruel to want the best for yourself.
So, with that being said: Don't even try this boy.

Breaking ur law of democracy…
————–
hi
scratch.mit.edu/discuss/post/3808662

HOW AM I BREAKING THE LAW OF DEMOCRACY!!!!
IN WHAT WAY?!?!?!?!?
You CAN'T SAY that I'm just breaking a democracy law without any reason.
You honestly have ZERO AUTHORITY TO even start THINKING about striking me.
BECAUSE THAT'S NOT HOW STRIKING WORKS!!!
MOVE THIS DISCUSSION TO THE OTHER THREAD.
You've pushed me over my breaking point. You're striked.

EDIT: WHAT DO HYOU MEAN I CANT CVHANGE THE LAWS. I OWN THE WHOLE THING. YOU'RE FIRED!
EDIT 2: YOU'RE BANNED! I'VE GIVEN YOU GOD KNOWS HOW MANY CHANCES! YES I'M MAD, BYE.

ajsya wrote:

Party time….

Nearly! Embracing the 1 year anniversary!!!

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

ContourLines wrote:

Dragonlord767 wrote:

I don't see how it would affect much. It's basically “the high rank people get what they want. We'll hold a vote but it won't change much”. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Its means that staff have more choice on what to pass because mclovers could of avoided getting a strike with this act and obviously he didn't like the passed law and he is the founder and he should have the final say in things (Ik this totally violates the current one).

I mean,

mclovers could of avoided getting a strike

anti-abuse with equality bill because the owner cannot edit it and he cannot remove his strikes.

obviously he didn't like the passed law and he is the founder and he should have the final say in things

then he wouldn't like mine and it would destroy my law lol.

bc u broke his trust

ajsya wrote:

Party time….

Friendly reminder:

On TIPS, a page of party got deleted because it wasn't constructive.

Thank you for your attention.

start snipping pls

smileycreations15 wrote:

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

ContourLines wrote:

Dragonlord767 wrote:

I don't see how it would affect much. It's basically “the high rank people get what they want. We'll hold a vote but it won't change much”. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Its means that staff have more choice on what to pass because mclovers could of avoided getting a strike with this act and obviously he didn't like the passed law and he is the founder and he should have the final say in things (Ik this totally violates the current one).

I mean,

mclovers could of avoided getting a strike

anti-abuse with equality bill because the owner cannot edit it and he cannot remove his strikes.

obviously he didn't like the passed law and he is the founder and he should have the final say in things

then he wouldn't like mine and it would destroy my law lol.

bc u broke his trust

I didn't. This law wasn't to argue about, It was just a friendly bill that got passed.

could we stop arguing!!! as governor I would like to act saying that arguments must end within a week.

ContourLines wrote:

could we stop arguing!!! as governor I would like to act saying that arguments must end within a week.

Is this a repeat of the pg 50 flame war? (Countour wasn't there, but look at it.)
It ended in at least the longest post in the history of SSB.
— TSR (The ShopBux Round) is now open again! The TSR is going to document this flame war once it reaches ending phase. —

AFNNetworkK12 wrote:

ContourLines wrote:

could we stop arguing!!! as governor I would like to act saying that arguments must end within a week.

Is this a repeat of the pg 50 flame war? (Countour wasn't there, but look at it.)
It ended in at least the longest post in the history of SSB.
— TSR (The ShopBux Round) is now open again! The TSR is going to document this flame war once it reaches ending phase. —

TSR isnt official and you have no authorization whatsoever.